Impact on consumers. No one knows exactly how much the Waxman-Markey bill will cost Americans. Douglas Elmendorf, the director of the Congressional Budget Office, testified before the Senate Committee on Finance that cap-and-trade program costs for energy producers would be "passed along to consumers of energy and energy-intensive products," (which would be in the form of higher prices). The CBO estimates that a 15 percent reduction in carbon emissions by 2020 through a cap-and-trade plan would cost the average American household $1,600 a year, with low-income households carrying a heavier burden. Lower-income households tend to spend more of their income on energy than higher-income households, because it is difficult to cut back on necessities like heating. The costs of the Waxman-Markey would differ from the CBO's estimate in a few ways. The costs could be greater because the billaims to reduce not just carbon but other greenhouse gases such as methane. The costs could also be lower: When the federal government auctions off the permits, it gets revenue back that is likely to be spent.
What will it save me? Some of the money raised from auctions will go to the consumer. For example, to try to reduce the impact of the bill on those with low incomes, Waxman-Markey would create a new tax credit that will give some money back. The CBO estimates that in 2012, this tax credit would amount to $161 for a single person or $359 for a five-person household. That year, only single people with incomes of less than $23,000 or families with at least two children making less than $42,000 would be eligible for the tax credit.
But who is to say that you paying $1500 more per year is not worth saving the planet?
Me.
If every American follows suit, BUT no one in China or India do, then you are paying for their unwillingness to do their part AND nothing you do will change anything - other than to weaken our economy (thus allowing China and India to speed ahead) and turning us into a 2nd world country. Now, I understand that the response is - so you advocate doing nothing and it will only get worse.
That answer is just as stupid as saying let's suck our thumbs.
Our technology, that industry giant we possess and do better, that will save our planet, NOT cutting back by a few light bulbs or gallons of gas. Our technology will save the planet, clean up the pollution, and cure the diseases that ravage the planet - NOT a global warming bill. Yet, the bill and others that will follow, will cripple our industry and technology, thus removing the only resource we have that can actually do something about the climate change.
global warming
Subscribe To
Posts
Comments